Category talk:Miscellaneous Heads of State
Much as we have miscellaneous PMs, we certainly have enough for Miscellaneous Presidents. I should point out that Presidents of Czechoslovakia and Presidents of France will probably become viable once Hitler's War is released.TR 19:40, 24 January 2009 (UTC) :Hmm, likely.Turtle Fan 19:54, 24 January 2009 (UTC) Consuls We have enough for a miscellaneous consuls category at this point, or Misc Consuls with Roman Consuls subcat (with an Atlantean Consuls subcat hopefully coming down the pike). Julius Caesar, Victor Radcliff, Isaac Fenner, Pendleton (Disunited States), and Publius Quinctilius Varus were all consuls of their respective nations. Plus, many Roman Emperors also took the title of consul, including Augustus, Caligula, Claudius (Roman Emperor) and Nero. TR 18:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC) :Don't forget Napoleon Blownapart. Jelay14 19:05, 30 January 2009 (UTC) ::Wasn't John Adams a consul in ADF? And Bryan and Jennings? Turtle Fan 19:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC) :::That office was called Censor. And actually someone named Adams was a candidate--I made it John Adams by fiat. In light of our quest for 5000 entries and 1000 Americans, I may reconsider that position. TR 20:32, 30 January 2009 (UTC) ::::Oh, we'll hit those benchmarks soon enough any which way. No need to undo a historical cameo--Those are so much fun. ::::I went back and looked and saw that they are indeed named Censors. What kind of half-assed title is that? The head of state and government's job is to make sure no one has their titties showing on a TV show? Turtle Fan 22:53, 30 January 2009 (UTC) :::::This was never explained. The FCA didn't seem any more puritanical than the US (which it probably should have been--evidently there was no English Revolution/Civil War as everyone opted to leave rather than fight). Since it was an elected position the FCA (and I guess HT) might have wanted a title other than consul, which historically seems to have been appointed by some law-making body or other. Granted, so was censor in most instances. TR 23:17, 30 January 2009 (UTC) ::::::I think it stands to reason that the FCA would be more relaxed socially if everyone who wasn't a Puritan hit the road--Then the Americas are full of "I'm okay, you're okay" types, and those who are scandalized by the sinful tapping of one's feet in time with the music stay in England and enjoy the fruits of their victory. :::::::There was no victory as there was no rebellion. Charles I (or someone) successfully implemented the divine right of kings, and Cromwell and his Roundheads left rather than fight. Thus my suggestion that the FCA might be more Puritanical. People weren't fleeing Cromwell, they were fleeing the King. TR 15:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC) ::::::::Oh-Okay. Now I see. Turtle Fan 15:54, 2 February 2009 (UTC) ::::::Without having reading, I don't see how the survival of Homo erectus would cause the British to be more tight-ass. The only thing I can think of is that easy-going non-Puritans flocked to the American shores in droves because, being sexually un-repressed, they were just dying for the chance to snicker at the name "Homo erectus" over and over and over again, like we did in the ninth grade. Turtle Fan 00:29, 31 January 2009 (UTC) :::::::Sims were much easier to fight and kill than the Amerindians in OTL. They weren't particulary good hunters, had not functional society, etc. Much easier to pack up and leave England if you don't like the government than in OTL. TR 15:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC) ::::::::It also means no trade partners, no frontier scouts, no mercenary allies, no one to show the settlers the ropes for local crops and growing seasons. Relations with Amerinds were often hostile, but not always. ::::::::If that were true, shouldn't it be truer still in Atlantis? No predators other than the eagles, food ripe for the taking for anyone not too dumb to sneak up on a bird that would ignore him, and a much shorter ocean crossing to boot. Yet Atlantis's different nature appears to have had next to no effect at all on British history at least up to the WfI. Turtle Fan 15:54, 2 February 2009 (UTC) :::::::ADF was a long time ago when HT was a more daring (and less prolific) author. TR 16:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC) ::::::Yeah, I miss those days. His AH used to be so cutting-edge. ::::::I wonder if the one quality--his being daring--is necessarily in an inverse relationship with the other, his being prolific? Turtle Fan 19:51, 2 February 2009 (UTC) :::::I rather suspect it. Now parallelism was ALWAYS there, so I'm not sure how that fits in my analysis. TR 20:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC) Finland and Poland You know, with Nicholas II floating around, we do have a foundation for "Heads of State of Finland" easily, and I think "Heads of State of Poland" as well, but I'm not sure. TR 19:24, August 1, 2010 (UTC)